Maybe the guy in the OP situation recognized the lack of sparks too but figured that even if the poster wouldn't make a life partner, she still might be fun to have dinner with, to see a particular movie with or attend the bowling tourney with. He's looking forward to Event X and planning his time accordingly and suddenly finds out the appointment is unilaterally canceled.

I'm just going to pull this quote because I think it's key and I hadn't thought of it until you posted it.

So she has decided that she feels no sparks and decides to cancel (not refuse, which would be fine) an already set date. She thinks of the date as one in a series towards a romantic relationship. Therefore (to her) there is no point in date number 2 if there is no chance of date number 3.However, he may be looking foward to seeing a movie/trying that new restaurant/visiting that fair etc... He is interested in both the event and planned activity and getting to know her. Maybe he would like to have that second date even if it is their last. It isn't the case for her, but she should not be making that decision for someone else.

I have spent short periods of time in the company of people I have never met before and have not seen since (usually friends of friends) and had a great time. I would be pissed if we made plans to go hangout and they cancelled because "we wouldn't be long term friends". Maybe I just wanted to have a fun afternoon at the beach.

I'm going to clarify some things that a few people are making assumptions about.

The reasons that I 'changed my mind' were that there were a few things mentioned on the first date that rang little alarm bells, but due to the fact that there were 'sparks' I was a bit stupid and pushed them to the back of my mind, then I accepted a very vague invitation to another date. There was no date, time, or event specified.

Over the next few days, without the influence of the sparks, the alarm bells got a bit louder and I realised it would not be a good idea to pursue a relationship. This man was definitely interested in a romantic relationship, not a friendship, he made that clear. I did ask in the e-mail if he still wanted to possibly stay in touch as friends, he declined.

My options were to let him down over e-mail, or let him down in person after he had made the effort to meet me and possibly got his hopes up for a third date.

I think I agree with some PPs that dating has slightly different etiquette parameters, in my mind anyway. A 'date' is never just another social engagement in the early days. You aren't meeting up for the sake of the movie or the food, most of us have friends for that, you're meeting up to see if you like each other enough to possibly enter into a romantic relationship and each further date is a step towards that.

I see that this differs from very traditional etiquette, but I know I'd hate it if someone went on a date with me out of a sense of obligation so I think I'll probably stick with my 'do as you would be done by' approach. Actually, I'll just remember in future to give myself 24 hours thinking time before agreeing to a second date!

To Betty Draper, I appreciate that you are stating the case for very strict traditional etiquette, I did not appreciate you calling me 'gauche', 'immature' and suggesting that my behaviour was contributing to my single status, I feel the things you called me were far more insulting than this man calling me 'disingenuous' and this is supposed to be a forum dedicated to politeness.

As there was no date, time, or event specified, I'd put this at the approximate level of "let's do lunch".

If someone says "lets do lunch" and doesn't follow up with a date, time and place, then any response of "sure, that would be great" should be taken with the same grain of salt. This wasn't a "date" you cancelled, it was just a heads up that you were 'breaking up' with him after your first date. And in retrospect, I probably wouldn't have even let him know I was cancelling a date that hadn't actually ever been made, I would have waited till he contacted you with a firmer invitaion, and then said, "sorry, this isn't going to work for me, best of luck, etc"

As there was no date, time, or event specified, I'd put this at the approximate level of "let's do lunch".

If someone says "lets do lunch" and doesn't follow up with a date, time and place, then any response of "sure, that would be great" should be taken with the same grain of salt. This wasn't a "date" you cancelled, it was just a heads up that you were 'breaking up' with him after your first date. And in retrospect, I probably wouldn't have even let him know I was cancelling a date that hadn't actually ever been made, I would have waited till he contacted you with a firmer invitaion, and then said, "sorry, this isn't going to work for me, best of luck, etc"

JMO

I agee and the update that changes things for me. If there was no actual "date" planned (ie no date, time, place)then I need to revise my "It's defintely rude" verdict. Until you have the date/time etc.. the iron clad RSVP does not not come into effect.

I don't get the White House thing either, but it is traditional. Anyone know if that's just a US thing or does it apply to an invitation from any head of state?

The basic issue of disagreement here seems to be if d@ting is governed by the same rules as other social engagements. For my part, I certainly hope that they do. What else is there? I guess there are specific situations that have other rules in effect (speed d@ting comes to mind), but that isn't the case here.

I always figured it was a holdover from other lands with monarchs, where the monarch's invitation to a subject is actually not an invitation, but a summons.

A White House invitation is not the same to anyone who doesn't work for the government, as the president is not the boss of us in the same way a king would be. However, I am comfortable with using it as a rhetorical flourish to mean "You can break off social engagements for once-in-a-lifetime, extremely important events, that cannot be rescheduled at your convenience." For instance, I would also not consider you bound to attend your best friend's kid's play (or even, I suppose, your best friend's wedding) if you are awarded a Nobel Prize that day. But if the mayor wants to give you the key to the city, and you can suggest that perhaps the 23rd would be a better date, then you wouldn't get to skip on tea with your annoying cousin.

As there was no date, time, or event specified, I'd put this at the approximate level of "let's do lunch".

If someone says "lets do lunch" and doesn't follow up with a date, time and place, then any response of "sure, that would be great" should be taken with the same grain of salt. This wasn't a "date" you cancelled, it was just a heads up that you were 'breaking up' with him after your first date. And in retrospect, I probably wouldn't have even let him know I was cancelling a date that hadn't actually ever been made, I would have waited till he contacted you with a firmer invitaion, and then said, "sorry, this isn't going to work for me, best of luck, etc"

JMO

I agee and the update that changes things for me. If there was no actual "date" planned (ie no date, time, place)then I need to revise my "It's defintely rude" verdict. Until you have the date/time etc.. the iron clad RSVP does not not come into effect.

POD the update changes everything. In fact the update" We'll have lunch, get together next week" etc. is exactly what etiquette suggests for "I really don't want to socialize with you again".

Etiquette presumes it IS a friendship-based engagement unless or until, as Miss Manners would say, one finds oneself unexpectedly swept off one's feet over the raspberry torte and champagne. To baldly and preemptively state something like "I don't really feel attracted to you and I don't expect that to change by dessert" is superfluous and gauche.

It was not a commitment with stated conditions (like "If I find a babysitter" or "If I mull it over and still find myself lusting for you on Tuesday,") -- it was a firm appointment and thus one can't get an etiquette pass for dodging it.

For the record -- in the OP's position I probably wouldn't keep the date either. But I would not kid myself that I was doing the correct thing by canceling. I would live forever haunted by the knowledge that in the eyes of etiquette I had committed a scurvy and improper act.

I was torn on my response here, because I think I would also have bailed on the 2nd date. But your response here has convinced me. It would have been rude, and I would be all too aware of it.

Logged

I have enough lithium in my medicine cabinet to power three cars across a sizeable desert. Which makes me officially...Three Cars Crazy

The reasons that I 'changed my mind' were that there were a few things mentioned on the first date that rang little alarm bells, but due to the fact that there were 'sparks' I was a bit stupid and pushed them to the back of my mind, then I accepted a very vague invitation to another date. There was no date, time, or event specified.

This makes aaaaall the difference for me. I thought that you canceled an actual date, not merely refused to solidify plans for one. You did fine.

If you had agreed to "dinner at 7:00 on Friday" then called to cancel you would have been rude.

The reasons that I 'changed my mind' were that there were a few things mentioned on the first date that rang little alarm bells, but due to the fact that there were 'sparks' I was a bit stupid and pushed them to the back of my mind, then I accepted a very vague invitation to another date. There was no date, time, or event specified.

This makes aaaaall the difference for me. I thought that you canceled an actual date, not merely refused to solidify plans for one. You did fine.

If you had agreed to "dinner at 7:00 on Friday" then called to cancel you would have been rude.

I didn't realise this was such a huge distinction, I said "yes I'd like to see you again, drop me a line and we'll arrange something" and changed it to 'actually, I don't want to see you again'.

Manners are a funny thing sometimes, I can't imagine that the lack of a date and time would have made the rejected person feel any happier about it, which was probably why I didn't think to specify earlier.

If changing one's mind about a vague date invitation made on the spot is rude then I guess I've been rude before.

Once I realize I have found a dealbreaker with someone, that is it. I can't force myself to see them again in a dating capacity. And trust me, I wouldn't be doing them any favors if I did. I have to wonder if one has to be a great actress to have great dating etiquette, because I wouldn't be able to pull off pretending that I was having a good time if I wasn't. There is a difference between "I don't feel like going anymore" and "I really have no ability to pretend and I don't want both of us to spend a really awkward night together, I care enough about you as a person to not put you through that".

I guess it is technically rude to cancel, but in my opinion it is the lesser wrong than deliberately continuing forward with something that you KNOW won't work and will potentially hurt someone more.

The reasons that I 'changed my mind' were that there were a few things mentioned on the first date that rang little alarm bells, but due to the fact that there were 'sparks' I was a bit stupid and pushed them to the back of my mind, then I accepted a very vague invitation to another date. There was no date, time, or event specified.

This makes aaaaall the difference for me. I thought that you canceled an actual date, not merely refused to solidify plans for one. You did fine.

If you had agreed to "dinner at 7:00 on Friday" then called to cancel you would have been rude.

I didn't realise this was such a huge distinction, I said "yes I'd like to see you again, drop me a line and we'll arrange something" and changed it to 'actually, I don't want to see you again'.

Manners are a funny thing sometimes, I can't imagine that the lack of a date and time would have made the rejected person feel any happier about it, which was probably why I didn't think to specify earlier.

To me, there is a very big distinction. Firm plans, with a date and time mean that the other person has arranged their life to make it possible -- in that case, canceling is rude, unless for absolute emergencies. But "let's get together sometime" is not a commitment on either person's part, so that never solidifying into firm plans is not rude.

I think that you got confused because you assumed that it's the rejection that is rude. It's not. It may be painful (for both parties), but it's not rude in-and-of itself. It's the cancellation of firm plans (a date) that is rude, because the other person has made a commitment.

Logged

Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bow lines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover. -Mark Twain

<snip> It was not a commitment with stated conditions (like "If I find a babysitter" or "If I mull it over and still find myself lusting for you on Tuesday,") -- it was a firm appointment and thus one can't get an etiquette pass for dodging it. <snip>

Actually, I think a lot of modern social events do come with implied conditions. If my boss invited me to the company Christmas party in October, the unstated condition is "as long as you're still working here." If my boyfriend and I make plans to go camping in a month, the unstated condition is "as long as we're still together." If someone sets up a date with me, the unstated condition is "as long as you're still potentially interested in d@ting me." If you're interested, fine. If you're not sure, that's fine.

Exactly. I agree. I am sorry if this makes me a rude person, but I would definitely not follow through with a date (vague or not) if I'd already decided there was no way I'd be interested in him, or if I'd decided I was uncomfortable with it for any reason. What's the point? He's clearly pursuing romance (presumably this was his stated intention on his on-line profile) and if I don't want that with him, let's nip that in the bud now rather than have both parties endure an uncomfortable evening. And let's not kid ourselves about the "friend" thing. The whole premise for the OP to get together with the guy in the first place was for dating. The guy isn't looking for a friend. He probably already has friends. He is searching for a mate. She is not it. dating is not the same as other social engagements. I can endure people I don't like at a party and nobody is expecting more from me, but in the dating world, the party who is no longer interested is obligated to step up to the plate and end it. Personally, it makes me very uncomfortable to be around someone who is interested in me when I don't share that feeling. Why should I put myself through a whole evening of discomfort? To spare his feelings? Well if he is that into me, then his feelings are going to be hurt anyway; more so if I lead him on by attending a 2nd date.

Of course, I would give plenty of notice (as opposed to calling half an hour before to say I'd changed my mind). I also might feel kind of obligated if tickets to something had already been purchased, or anything like that.

I agree that it's best not to accept in the first place, but sometimes you really do feel put on the spot and find yourself saying, "Oh OK, sure." Or it may seem like a good idea at the time. And then after the fact, become increasingly uncomfortable with the idea. I say in the dating world it's best to trust your gut.